6 ms·

Are you sure? He used it to help get Donald Trump elected, and now Musk has an unassailable position in government and tremendous power to steer government spen

Are you sure? He used it to help get Donald Trump elected, and now Musk has an unassailable position in government and tremendous power to steer government spending to his businesses, and to cripple the agencies that regulate them.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
llm_nerd 1y ago
Unassailable? Musk is a lightning rod. Surely he must realize that after he has served his purpose, he will be cast aside and likely end up imprisoned if not worse, right? Have people paid no attention to what happens to almost everyone in Trump's orbit? In Musk's case it will be hugely politically valuable to use him as a sponge for anger, pretend that he was free-ranging, and cast him aside. Therefore Oceania had always been at war with Eurasia. We've seen this pattern with Trump time and time again, and it's amazing that Musk seems so completely delusional about this guaranteed outcome.
- davidham 1y ago
  Musk is different from the other people in Trump’s orbit. Trump can’t afford to throw Musk aside or turn him into an enemy. Not yet anyway. This is not to say that there won’t be a breakup, there may yet be. But it seems like Musk was able to parlay his Twitter investment into tremendous direct influence over the government, a pearl without price. I don’t know that he ever cared whether Twitter made money or not.
  - llm_nerd 1y ago
    Trump and the MAGA cult is far bigger than Musk. Musk was against Trump, and actually backed DeSantis. Did not matter at all. If Trump turned his cult against Musk, Musk would be done. Immediately all of the bootlickers and retweeters would deride everything Musk has said or done. Musk's money would be meaningless, and he'd be the next "Soros" in their minds. Musk clearly cares incredibly about whether Twitter makes money, and has been desperately flailing around to try to make it viable. They're currently suing advertisers who don't advertise there, which is farcical. Musk really believed his grand "we'll be your bank!" thing would be some simple thing (because everything is super easy to do for someone who doesn't actually understand or do any of it)
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
  - acdha 1y ago
    I’ve been wondering about that because it seems like the relationship is increasingly unbalanced in Trump’s favor. Musk is very exposed to Trump now: he needs pardons or abeyance of enforcement for DOGE, all of his companies are exposed to multiple regulators, and he depends on government contracts. A lot of the money he throws around in politics is leveraged on his stock holdings, so a regulatory move which affects that would also cut into his ability to fight back. In contrast, while Trump was somewhat addicted to X he doesn’t need it after the election the way he did before and he’s shifted a lot to Truth Social. Before the election, he depended on Musk’s money but he’s been taking in a huge war chest which he can use to keep Republicans in line, too.
- root_axis 1y ago
  I think the idea that Trump and Musk have a falling out is wishful thinking - they have too many aligned long-term incentives. Also, Trump consistently rewards public loyalty, especially the extremely sycophantic kind that Elon exudes. "Unassailable" is a dramatic way to phrase it, but its more or less accurate.
  - llm_nerd 1y ago
    I'm not being wishful. It is an absolute certainty. Like as certain as the heat death of the universe. We're only two months in and already the friction is growing. Both have absolutely colossal egos. Both demand being the centre of attention at all times, and both have a weird Mafioso "family dynasty" thing going on. I mean, look at Musk dropping in on various Trump meetings. I don't think you could say he was being sycophantic at all, but quite contrary is giving off major "these are my employees" energy. Add that Musk is increasingly whiny. He's starting to realize that the people aren't going to love him for the things he is doing, and he's realizing this isn't the long term advantage he thinks. At some point, sooner rather than later, they're going to disagree on something. It might not even be a big thing. Or maybe Trump will just decide it's political capital to jettison Musk during some crisis or other. The egos will clash, Musk will be declared a "RINO" (like almost 100% of Trump's first cabinet and underlings) and every protection will evaporate. Musk's "favorability rating" is collapsing (currently -19 and dropping). He is a sponge taking all of the negativity, and once he has absorbed enough he's going to get jettisoned.
    - root_axis 1y ago
      > Both have absolutely colossal egos. This matters less than you think. Trump has no problem setting aside his ego to further his agenda. Remember his leaked calls with the Mexican president? Remember his submission to Putin in Helsinki? His entire cabinet is made up of people who have trashed him, his own VP called him literally the next Hitler. Trump acts very rationally when it comes to power dynamics, casting off Elon only creates problems for him, no benefits. > but quite contrary is giving off major "these are my employees" energy. That's just the vibes you're picking up, Trump doesn't care about this, he's the one sitting at the desk. What he cares about is the unending stream of praise that Elon glazes him with. "Trump was right about everything", "Trump is the greatest president ever", walking around in Trump swag etc etc. Allowing Musk to crash a couple meetings with the press means nothing. > and he's realizing this isn't the long term advantage he thinks Elon is all-in, he's burned every other bridge, a Trump alliance is the only long-term advantage he has. > Musk's "favorability rating" is collapsing (currently -19 and dropping). Except with Trump's base, where it has climbed from -10 to +50. There is close to 0 possibility of Elon being jettisoned.
naasking 1y ago
> He used it to help get Donald Trump elected The idea that X had any influence on the election is laughable.
- dboreham 1y ago
  For the set of people I know who seem to hold weird false ideas about society and politics, all of them appear to get those ideas from Twitter.
  - naasking 1y ago
    1. Even if that were true, why is your "set of people" representative of such a large fraction of the US population that it would sway an election? 2. Even if it were somehow representative, is it more plausible that all of these people were on X getting these ideas (a platform that is small relative to other media), or that these ideas were simply blasted everywhere? 3. And even if it were somehow representative, and they did get those ideas from X, what makes you think that not having those ideas "false" ideas would have changed the election outcome [1]? People more often use "facts" to justify political positions they've already made, not the other way around. [1] https://time.com/7263845/facts-dont-matter-misinformation-essay/ https://time.com/7263845/facts-dont-matter-misinformation-es...
- 9rx 1y ago
  > The idea that X had any influence on the election is laughable. Likewise, the idea that a hammer has influence on building a house is laughable. But, of course, that is not what was said. It was said that Elon Musk had influence, helped by tools like X. I fully expect that "Elon is gonna come and clean up all the useless jobs in government just like he did at X!" won a lot of votes. So, while X itself has no influence – it is inanimate, it was undoubtedly an important tool in allowing Musk to achieve the influence he offered.
  - naasking 1y ago
    The plain English reading of "He used [X/Twitter] to help get Donald Trump elected" is quite clearly "X/Twitter was an integral part of getting Trump elected". There is zero evidence that this is the case. > it was undoubtedly an important tool in allowing Musk to achieve the influence he offered. I doubt it completely, mainly because there is no evidence of this, but please do cite the evidence that convinced you of this. Until then, I'll consider the most plausible scenario to be that this is a convincing story you've told yourself because social media is likely a big part of your life, and the lives of your immediate social circle, so of course you would think it was important, despite X/Twitter's relative unimportance compared to other social media.
ergocoder 1y ago
I just saw Trump in a press conference announcing huge funding for OpenAI, whom Musk tries to destroy “Tremendous power” you say?
- root_axis 1y ago
  He obviously has tremendous influence, that's basically indisputable. That doesn't mean there aren't other influences in the mix.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

llm_nerd 1y ago

Unassailable? Musk is a lightning rod. Surely he must realize that after he has served his purpose, he will be cast aside and likely end up imprisoned if not worse, right? Have people paid no attention to what happens to almost everyone in Trump's orbit? In Musk's case it will be hugely politically valuable to use him as a sponge for anger, pretend that he was free-ranging, and cast him aside. Therefore Oceania had always been at war with Eurasia. We've seen this pattern with Trump time and time again, and it's amazing that Musk seems so completely delusional about this guaranteed outcome.

davidham 1y ago
Musk is different from the other people in Trump’s orbit. Trump can’t afford to throw Musk aside or turn him into an enemy. Not yet anyway. This is not to say that there won’t be a breakup, there may yet be. But it seems like Musk was able to parlay his Twitter investment into tremendous direct influence over the government, a pearl without price. I don’t know that he ever cared whether Twitter made money or not.
- llm_nerd 1y ago
  Trump and the MAGA cult is far bigger than Musk. Musk was against Trump, and actually backed DeSantis. Did not matter at all. If Trump turned his cult against Musk, Musk would be done. Immediately all of the bootlickers and retweeters would deride everything Musk has said or done. Musk's money would be meaningless, and he'd be the next "Soros" in their minds. Musk clearly cares incredibly about whether Twitter makes money, and has been desperately flailing around to try to make it viable. They're currently suing advertisers who don't advertise there, which is farcical. Musk really believed his grand "we'll be your bank!" thing would be some simple thing (because everything is super easy to do for someone who doesn't actually understand or do any of it)
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
- acdha 1y ago
  I’ve been wondering about that because it seems like the relationship is increasingly unbalanced in Trump’s favor. Musk is very exposed to Trump now: he needs pardons or abeyance of enforcement for DOGE, all of his companies are exposed to multiple regulators, and he depends on government contracts. A lot of the money he throws around in politics is leveraged on his stock holdings, so a regulatory move which affects that would also cut into his ability to fight back. In contrast, while Trump was somewhat addicted to X he doesn’t need it after the election the way he did before and he’s shifted a lot to Truth Social. Before the election, he depended on Musk’s money but he’s been taking in a huge war chest which he can use to keep Republicans in line, too.
root_axis 1y ago
I think the idea that Trump and Musk have a falling out is wishful thinking - they have too many aligned long-term incentives. Also, Trump consistently rewards public loyalty, especially the extremely sycophantic kind that Elon exudes. "Unassailable" is a dramatic way to phrase it, but its more or less accurate.
- llm_nerd 1y ago
  I'm not being wishful. It is an absolute certainty. Like as certain as the heat death of the universe. We're only two months in and already the friction is growing. Both have absolutely colossal egos. Both demand being the centre of attention at all times, and both have a weird Mafioso "family dynasty" thing going on. I mean, look at Musk dropping in on various Trump meetings. I don't think you could say he was being sycophantic at all, but quite contrary is giving off major "these are my employees" energy. Add that Musk is increasingly whiny. He's starting to realize that the people aren't going to love him for the things he is doing, and he's realizing this isn't the long term advantage he thinks. At some point, sooner rather than later, they're going to disagree on something. It might not even be a big thing. Or maybe Trump will just decide it's political capital to jettison Musk during some crisis or other. The egos will clash, Musk will be declared a "RINO" (like almost 100% of Trump's first cabinet and underlings) and every protection will evaporate. Musk's "favorability rating" is collapsing (currently -19 and dropping). He is a sponge taking all of the negativity, and once he has absorbed enough he's going to get jettisoned.
  - root_axis 1y ago
    > Both have absolutely colossal egos. This matters less than you think. Trump has no problem setting aside his ego to further his agenda. Remember his leaked calls with the Mexican president? Remember his submission to Putin in Helsinki? His entire cabinet is made up of people who have trashed him, his own VP called him literally the next Hitler. Trump acts very rationally when it comes to power dynamics, casting off Elon only creates problems for him, no benefits. > but quite contrary is giving off major "these are my employees" energy. That's just the vibes you're picking up, Trump doesn't care about this, he's the one sitting at the desk. What he cares about is the unending stream of praise that Elon glazes him with. "Trump was right about everything", "Trump is the greatest president ever", walking around in Trump swag etc etc. Allowing Musk to crash a couple meetings with the press means nothing. > and he's realizing this isn't the long term advantage he thinks Elon is all-in, he's burned every other bridge, a Trump alliance is the only long-term advantage he has. > Musk's "favorability rating" is collapsing (currently -19 and dropping). Except with Trump's base, where it has climbed from -10 to +50. There is close to 0 possibility of Elon being jettisoned.

naasking 1y ago

> He used it to help get Donald Trump elected The idea that X had any influence on the election is laughable.

dboreham 1y ago
For the set of people I know who seem to hold weird false ideas about society and politics, all of them appear to get those ideas from Twitter.
- naasking 1y ago
  1. Even if that were true, why is your "set of people" representative of such a large fraction of the US population that it would sway an election? 2. Even if it were somehow representative, is it more plausible that all of these people were on X getting these ideas (a platform that is small relative to other media), or that these ideas were simply blasted everywhere? 3. And even if it were somehow representative, and they did get those ideas from X, what makes you think that not having those ideas "false" ideas would have changed the election outcome [1]? People more often use "facts" to justify political positions they've already made, not the other way around. [1] https://time.com/7263845/facts-dont-matter-misinformation-essay/ https://time.com/7263845/facts-dont-matter-misinformation-es...
9rx 1y ago
> The idea that X had any influence on the election is laughable. Likewise, the idea that a hammer has influence on building a house is laughable. But, of course, that is not what was said. It was said that Elon Musk had influence, helped by tools like X. I fully expect that "Elon is gonna come and clean up all the useless jobs in government just like he did at X!" won a lot of votes. So, while X itself has no influence – it is inanimate, it was undoubtedly an important tool in allowing Musk to achieve the influence he offered.
- naasking 1y ago
  The plain English reading of "He used [X/Twitter] to help get Donald Trump elected" is quite clearly "X/Twitter was an integral part of getting Trump elected". There is zero evidence that this is the case. > it was undoubtedly an important tool in allowing Musk to achieve the influence he offered. I doubt it completely, mainly because there is no evidence of this, but please do cite the evidence that convinced you of this. Until then, I'll consider the most plausible scenario to be that this is a convincing story you've told yourself because social media is likely a big part of your life, and the lives of your immediate social circle, so of course you would think it was important, despite X/Twitter's relative unimportance compared to other social media.

ergocoder 1y ago

I just saw Trump in a press conference announcing huge funding for OpenAI, whom Musk tries to destroy “Tremendous power” you say?

root_axis 1y ago
He obviously has tremendous influence, that's basically indisputable. That doesn't mean there aren't other influences in the mix.